NATO shills explain this

If Russia is actually fighting at full power in Ukraine then why haven’t they sent 3 million men at the special military operation zone? There’s still only 150k Russian soldiers there and 300k more on the way. If they send all their soldiers at Ukraine they can threaten nukes at anyone who attacks them while they are defenseless.

  1. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >trusting vatnik numbers
    Couldn’t be me

  2. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    That number isnt just pure infantry, its the entire military including all the office workers, supply workers (LMAO), etc Weve already seen Naval crewmen and Nuke Force being used as tank crewmen lol

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >and Nuke Force being used as tank crewmen lol
      Hey now it was the guarding units tasked to guard the actual nuclear silos that got sent :^)

  3. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    If your army has 1 million men, you can only field a fraction of that.

    You several men playing a support role for each one deployed.

    The US could barley field 300k back during the Iraq invasion.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Yeah, but not because we didn't have more manpower.
      1. US had to maintain garrisons in Europe, Middle East, and CONUS
      2. the desire to keep divisions in reserve
      3. the desire to limit the number of Guard/Reserve units deploying
      4. the fact that political leaders (Bush, Cheney, obv) didn't want to send many troops
      Also, I dont know where the hell you got 300,000, it was 160,000

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Maybe he’s confused total allied forces?

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        They sent considerably less troops then 300 000, which is still over 100k shy of what think-tank projections commissioned under Clinton determined would be needed to occupy Iraq without it erupting into sectarian violence.

        But the Bush admin wanted to mollify the public by underselling the war with "less is more" figleafs.

        The USA could have sent far, far more troops. It deliberately didn't.

  4. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    They can't supply the troops going to the front right now, they'd have to share guns if they mobilised that many men.

  5. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    they've been barely able to equip and deploy the 150-450k so far and they've already had to resort to barely trained boomers

  6. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    For every fighting man there are at least five more needed in logistics to keep him fighting. In America, there are ten per infantry. You do the math poltard.

  7. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >muh numbers
    Learn how logistics work. Russia doesn't have the logistics to utilize that many people.

  8. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    You can't send three million Russians anywhere with out two things happening. The first being the total collapse of what little 8th Century Kieven Rus logistics system they have left. The second is the collapse of the already tottering Russian economy.

  9. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >Attack another country and expect to win with a tiny fraction of your military
    >After this fails, do nothing for 6 months but take casualties
    No matter how you try to spin this, Russia comes out looking ass-tier. Either it has a big military and chose not to use it because it likes killing its own soldiers, or it was a paper tiger all along.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >design your BTGs to mostly rely on conscripts
      >don't use conscription before invasion
      >send skeleton of poorly formed units into prepared defenses
      >lose most of your professional soldiers
      >finally mobilize
      >BTGs still grossly undermanned because officer and enlisted ranks are dead/wounded

      To this day I will never understand the thinking behind the Russian BTG formations.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >thinking behind the Russian BTG formations
        You quickly understand the logic if you consider that Russian military is by design defensive one intented to fight against a stronger enemy inside Russia during a defensive war.
        Using such army for large scale offensive operations is obviously fucking retarded.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          >Russian military is by design defensive one intented to fight against a stronger enemy inside Russia during a defensive war.
          something poutine really should have though about before kicking off his little short bus special

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          This. They're designed to be used defensively and filled out with hastily trained conscripts or offensively with whatever proxy Russia is assisting.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        It makes some sense considering Russian involvement in Syria and Donbas. The BTG was a relatively small but heavily armed unit designed to operate in conjunction with supplemental light infantry by the Syrians or Dombabweans. Ironically the tables have turned and the Ukrainians are the ones making the most advantage of light infantry with their NG and TDF units.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >thinking behind the Russian BTG formations
        You quickly understand the logic if you consider that Russian military is by design defensive one intented to fight against a stronger enemy inside Russia during a defensive war.
        Using such army for large scale offensive operations is obviously fucking retarded.

        It's conscription *or* having 'allied' meatshields to fill the same role, right? Whoever designed the doctrine would have made sure the Donbabweans were in the BMPs instead of doing frontal assaults on Avdiivka for 8 goddamn months.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        During operations Кoнтpaкт soldiers are the closest thing the RUAF has to NCOs. Considering just how many of that class of soldier is dead, incapacitated, or captured the poor bastards being sent to replace them are going to living a life of fear and confusion until a shell blows up the mud pit they've been told to hold to the death.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        And also don't have anyone to lead your conscripts anymore since officers and enlisted are dead or wounded.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          don't forget the cannibalized training corps so you no longer have any trainers to tard wrangle your retarded conscripts.

  10. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >what is equipment

  11. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    1 million active personnel doesn't mean 1 million infantry, not even close.

  12. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Explain this vatnik

    If they couldn’t move 200k soldiers into Ukraine like they initially planned, what makes you think they can move 300k-1m more conscripts?
    Especially considering that they are seriously low on working vehicles and actively having logistics hubs targeted?

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Proof they couldn't? Video game footage doesn't count.

      The Russians comfortably supplied their 300k initial army with 0 difficulty. They merely exceed at a strategy called strategic depth, where you fall back constantly. To do this, they take tons of anwmy land and slowly fall back, grinding down the enemy as they retreated.

      So every retreated is actually another win for Russia. Soon ukraine will run out of manpower just like Hitler. Then nazis are open season once more.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous
      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >40mileconvoy.mov

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          there is no actual evidence of this though.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            sure bud, if that helps you sleep at night

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            define what you would accept as evidence

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              an untouched satellite photo from a neutral party showing the entire convoy. all we've seen are photos of a small stretch of no more than a few hundred yards, accompanied by hyperbolic claims that it stretched for X kilometers, where X seems to have grown with each retelling, from a marginally believable 10 km at first to eventually encompassing utterly risible claims that it was 40 miles long.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Name one neutral party with the capability to provide that proof.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                define neutral party

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                are you actually retarded or do you just enjoy the frisson of shame from pretending?

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                So you cannot.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                You haven't named a neutral party yet

                i accept your surrender

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Damn, they don't even teach you guys English before sending you in.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                moron there's more proof of the 40km convoy than there is of the million-man army

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                You haven't named a neutral party yet

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          That was a Ukrainian convoy. Russia would never screw up like that.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          I think you mean 40mileconvoy.notmov

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Your English is broken as fuck

  13. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    ever hear of a "no-show job"

  14. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    If they really have 3 million men at the ready why are they recruiting prisoners and why are people escaping Russia?

  15. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >Active
    This includes everyone in uniform, so sailors, pilots, staff officers, specialists, analysts, support. Maybe 20% of these guys are ground combat units
    >Reserve
    These are not like western style reserves that are actively attached to a unit and train regularly. They are just former soldiers subject to the first wave of mobilization. The current spectacle is Russia dipping into this pool of people.

  16. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Because not all of them are riflemen or tank drivers, retard. They also can't turn those 2mil into soldiers overnight. Even the thickest 4chantard would have realized the invasion was real when Russia started mobilizing its military.

    But lets focus on the active military, I hope you can understand why professional soldiers are more valuable than reservists. 200,000 of those are either in the navy or strategic rocket forces. There are a few naval infantry units who can be used as regular infantry (and have been), but most of those are sailors or other people who have no use in Ukraine. Then you've got another 165k in the air force. The air force has been present, it hasn't done much, but not lack of trying. Now you're down to (generously) 650k. In a normal military over half of those guys are going to be logistics. They don't need to be in Ukraine to do their jobs. They load trains, drive trucks, and sleep in Russia. And Russia still has other military commitments. Syria, Georgia, the 'stans, there's gotta be at least a border guard with China, they're not going to invade overnight but if Russia starts looking like a failed state...

    Of what remains, only some of the formations are high quality (by Russian standards.) Are you really going to bring the 69th Churka Rifle Division on your thunder run to Kyiv? That initial punch was the tip of the spear. Everyone on PrepHole knows 1GTA, but the Crimean forces were top notch as well (and generally achieved their goals, it must be said.) 37th GMRB was on the right bank drive on Kyiv, VDV and spetsznaz were heavily committed, the list goes on. The shit that was left behind has been thrown in piecemeal since then to stop the bleeding, and once that stopped working they went with partial mobilization.

  17. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    if they sent all 3 million into ukraine, you can kiss what little russian industry and economy goodbye.

  18. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Because they are too poor and stupid and arm and feed 1/3 of this number

  19. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Ok russian retard shills, why would you start a war not fighting at full strength? The US heemed the shit out of Iraq in like 3 days. Why would Russia fuck around so much if they could avoid it?

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Because Putin is hell-bent on trying to prove Sun-Tzu wrong, and the fellow wrote:
      "There is no instance of a nation benefitting from prolonged warfare."

  20. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    bump

  21. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Let's break this down:
    Active Personnel: 1,000,000 (likely closer to 800,000 in reality but lets assume a million)
    >~350,000 in branches with limited role in ground combat (Army, Navy, Rocket)
    >~150,000 administrators, technicians, etc who's job isn't near a combat zone
    >~150,000 conscripts undergoing training
    >~50,000 soldiers deployed elsewhere
    >~300,000 soldiers who actually could operate in combat inside Ukraine

    Other sources of manpower: 100,000 (these numbers are a bit more unclear but I think I err on being too generous)
    >~60,000 LDPR soldiers
    >~30,000 Rosgvardia incl. Kadyrovites
    >~10,000 Wagner

    The Reserves Personnel: 2,000,000
    >~300,000 that we are seeing mobilized right now. They're not attached to a unit and don't train regularly, pretty much worthless in the short term.
    >~1,700,000 other guys with military service not currently being mobilized but subject to next wave. Again they are not actively training
    >??? BARS these guys are all contracts and have already been sent to Ukraine (we can probably count them in the 300,000 ground combats because of our generous assumptions above)

    Between casualties and troop rotations Russia is probably barely treading water in terms of keeping about 250,000 ground combat troops in Ukraine. If they want to send useless conscripts to die in waves they're welcome too.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      this
      the first wave was already ~150-200k as estimated by US intelligence, so Russia made an all-out effort from day one

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >against all logic they mobilize 2,000,000 troops
      >trained in 1 week
      >troops sent into battle enemy at the gates style, with 1 rifle for 2 men
      >rear echs armed with a pikes and muskets
      >barrier troops, also armed with pikes, to prevent backwards movement
      russian tidal wave will crush the ukranians

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >Ukraine puts all of their 20k Maxim guns in line against charging vatniks
        >The Ultimate Kino

  22. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    There is an old soviet proverb of trusting the person who counts the numbers.

  23. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    If they can send a million men in, then why the fuck do they need to mobilize civilians for frontline service? Lets assume for a moment that those numbers are even correct and not just more paper tiger bullshit. Those numbers don't equate to men fighting on the ground. Wrapped up in that you have noncombatants, training personnel, engineers, mechanics, stores officers, medics, dentists, cooks and legions upon legions of clerks- all the people you need to actually make an army run. You start throwing them into the grinder and everything they used to do starts to suffer.

    Secondly, how the fuck do you plan to get them there? Have you any idea how large a number a million people is? Just moving that many people into depots so they can be geared up would be a colossal, intricate undertaking that Russia is sorely unprepared for even assuming the equipment exists to prep that many people to begin with. Then you need to get them to the AO (easier said than done when your enemy is likely to notice massive, slow fucking troop movements like that). And then what?

    You now have a million 'soldiers' sitting around in the AO who need food, lodging, medical supplies and ammo. They need vehicles to move them, and those vehicles also require parts, ammo and fuel. They all need officers who can receive and issue orders, because despite whatever russia thinks you can't just throw people like grain and hope it will sprout. They need objectives, and to leverage the numbers advantage they need to be well organized enough that different groups can independently tackle separate objectives otherwise its literally just a wasteful and horrifyingly inefficient human wave attack.

    This is the dilemma Russia is facing in this war. They have manpower with mobilization, but on both a material and organizational level literally everything else is missing, defective or never fucking existed to begin with.

  24. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    do it
    mobilize those 3 million, 25 million men, or whatever

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      It's actually 46 million plus a new 1.8 million each year forever.

  25. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    kek this was actually talked about on Solovyov's show yesterday. The military expert said most of them aren't combat worthy.

  26. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >20,000 tanks in reserve
    >30,000,000 of vets
    >modern gear
    >putin
    >allies
    >EW

    [...]

    km convoy
    >kiev will fall in 3 hours
    >not in war
    >in war with NATO
    >paid voluntaries

    [...]

    nukes
    >moska didnt sank

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >Eyebrows: raised
      >Gloves: off
      >Puccia: stronk
      >Dick: pre-sucked
      >Stupid brotherly khokhol piggies: squealing
      >Name: Legible
      >Sims: only 2
      >Not like Ghost of Keev
      >Not like your chud Marvel movies
      >Ratnik, not vatnik

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous
  27. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Because it would result in a fucking revolution, dumbass. There's a reason they only 'partially' mobilized, and even that's proven incredibly unpopular.

  28. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    boomp for more vatnik seethe

  29. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Because those 3 million include every service.
    Just like the 1 million includes every service and of them ~240k are the actual frontline troops of the ground forces which were all participating in the SMO by March.
    Similarly, the 750k of Ukraine are not all of them frontline troops.
    >There’s still only 150k Russian soldiers there
    Even just by Russian propaganda numbers that would imply over 40k cassualties. And those numbers have always been bulshit.

  30. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    because vatnik logistics are even worse than vatnik tactics. They couldn't get 3 million men to Ukraine even if they wanted to

  31. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    what's the tactical advantage of getting stomped so hard you lose 5 artillery batteries in one day's time?

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >source: UAF
      come on, man

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *